Chris Johnson calls for 100 storey towers in Sydney

[Mornnb]

It's not a fat pig, it's a plain girl in ugly clothing. The problem is the facade not the buildings structure. Replace the brown concrete with quality glass and you'll have an okay building.

[Fabian]

Originally Posted by Avatar

It's an abomination it should never have been approved. The tower will be worse than it was before work started. Lipstick on a fat pig is simply goinf to highlight how vulgar the tower is.

I've hardly noticed any changes to the exterior ever since the crane went up.

Originally Posted by mic

Sydney is Australia's Global city in contempory times.

It recently held the Olympic Games and it is a tourist hot spot, it is stunningly beautiful and deserves the respect that it receives on the world stage. Through its beauty and the fact that it is the centre of the largest population conurbanisation in the country it has been able to attract many headquaters and their affiliated businesses.

Its a great city that has a wow factor there is no denying it.

Melbourne on the other hand was rundown, industrial and suffered from economic stagnation when world economies globalised and shifted from manufacturing to services. The global nature of the economy did not accomodate for Australias Duopoly of Melbourne and Sydney and therefore what you see today is Sydney powering ahead and Melbourne offering the alternate lifestyle that second cities often do. Will it remain this way?? I believe so as Sydney is too beautiful not to continue to attract global tourist and conglomorate corporates.

It is what it is.

Sydney vs Melbourne vs Brisbane

It's like men at a urinal comparing

Back to the 100 stories for a moment. Is there actually any valid reason for them? To me it reeks of let's be like New York rather than solving urban housing and office issues.

[Melbourneguy]

And with all that, Melbourne's still growing faster (in total numbers) than all the other cities. Must be doing something right!

[shuan]

I wonder why Brisbane is hardly ever mentioned in these Sydney vs Melbourne debates.
It shows the ignorant and egotistical nature of southern people. I agree that Sydney is by far the most recognized city in Australia overseas, but I hate that "global brand" tag people use. Sydney is a city, not a corporation.

As for Sydney really being "Australia's greatest city", that is a matter of opinion. Certainly not the greatest place to live. IMO, Brisbane has the best quality of life in Australia, and just from an economic point of view it is going to become a lot more important even in the next two to three years.

As for cities like Hong Kong or Singapore, why would Sydney or Brisbane want to emulate them? We would be lowering our standard of living. Most world cities are actually crap ( I've lived in a few ) Often second-tier cities are better than "global cities".

[Paddo]

Originally Posted by Melbourneguy

And with all that, Melbourne's still growing faster (in total numbers) than all the other cities. Must be doing something right!

For the 12 months to June 2011 Sydney and Melbourne grew by almost the same amount with only a few thousand difference between them however I'm keen to see the current 12 months to June 2012, I think you might find Sydney has passed Melbourne in total growth numbers. Melbournes population growth has been in decline for the past 3 years while Sydney's growth has increased over the same period

[Mornnb]

Originally Posted by Brisbane_Rulz

Back to the 100 stories for a moment. Is there actually any valid reason for them? To me it reeks of let's be like New York rather than solving urban housing and office issues.

In Sydney there is a valid reason for 100 story buildings, beyond the benefits to the city of landmark buildings and adding to the skyline. The CBD is getting so dense that there is a shortage of sites and some new developments have seen skyscrapers as high as 80m destroyed for taller buildings. Soon the 103m waterboard building is to be destroyed to make way for the 236m 115 Bathurst Street.
100 story buildings would allow the CBD to accommodate more of the cities demand for offices, rather than having to send them to places like Parramatta and North Ryde.

Originally Posted by shuan

As for cities like Hong Kong or Singapore, why would Sydney or Brisbane want to emulate them? We would be lowering our standard of living. Most world cities are actually crap ( I've lived in a few ) Often second-tier cities are better than "global cities".

Our cities are rapidly growing and are going to change a lot, that is unavoidable. Sydney and Melbourne are both heading for being well over 6 million people. The question is do we want to emulate high density cities like New York and Hong Kong, or low density cities like Dallas and Los Angeles? I'd argue that higher density cities have better amenities, more active shopping and night lives and much higher quality of life.

Originally Posted by shuan

I wonder why Brisbane is hardly ever mentioned in these Sydney vs Melbourne debates.
It shows the ignorant and egotistical nature of southern people. I agree that Sydney is by far the most recognized city in Australia overseas, but I hate that "global brand" tag people use. Sydney is a city, not a corporation.

Sydney having a global brand, doesn't take anything away from Brisbane.
It's good for Australia as a whole to have a well known global city.

[brianc68]

Originally Posted by Paddo

For the 12 months to June 2011 Sydney and Melbourne grew by almost the same amount with only a few thousand difference between them however I'm keen to see the current 12 months to June 2012, I think you might find Sydney has passed Melbourne in total growth numbers. Melbournes population growth has been in decline for the past 3 years while Sydney's growth has increased over the same period

It's true. Population growth rates will vary between the major cities from time to time. And as they say in the financial world - past trends don't necessarily provide an indicator for future performance. Melbourne has had a spurt the last few years, but Sydney could well be on the way back. In my opinion though, the % rates of growth will be higher in Brisbane and Perth over the longer term.

[brianc68]

Originally Posted by Mornnb

Are cities are rapidly growing, Sydney and Melbourne are both heading for being well over 6 million people. The question is do we want to emulate high density cities like New York and Hong Kong, or low density cities like Dallas and Los Angeles? I'd argue that higher density cities have better amenities, more active shopping and night lives and much higher quality of life.

I don't think it will be an "either/or" situation for Australian cities. There will be both sprawl AND higher densities around the core, and other suburban centres.

I read a report last week that said the population within the 7km radius of the Brisbane CBD has increased 29% in the last 20 years (ie infill and density). At the same time there's no denying the sprawl accross metro Brisbane.

I think Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane will sprawl AND densify. Not sure about Perth, I think it might predominantly sprawl..

BTW there is MASSIVE sprawl surrounding the central core of New York - across three states in fact. I think North America provides the best model for how Australian cities develop.

[Melbourneguy]

[Q I think you might find Sydney has passed Melbourne in total growth numbers. Melbournes population growth has been in decline for the past 3 years while Sydney's growth has increased over the same period[/QUOTE]

And your reference for this fact?
Melbourne had the largest population growth from 2001-2011.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@....011&num=&view=

[brianc68]

The ABS report issued in June this year shows growth rates over the last 10 year period 2001 - 2011 as follows:
Greater Melbourne - 647,200
Greater Sydney - 477,600
Greater Brisbane - 432,300

Brisbane's % increase was highest of the three at 25%. Perth's rate was 26% was highest of all, however lower in raw number terms.

Greater Brisbane (not including the Gold Coast) added almost the same raw number of people as greater Sydney.

As for trends in the last year or two I'm not sure, but longer term comparisons are more useful as they can vary year to year.

[Sky_Is_The_Limit]

Originally Posted by Brisbane_Rulz

Sydney vs Melbourne vs Brisbane

It's like men at a urinal comparing

Back to the 100 stories for a moment. Is there actually any valid reason for them? To me it reeks of let's be like New York rather than solving urban housing and office issues.

Why do you bother posting.

Apart from Paddo who has emailed Brad Hazzard?

[Mornnb]

Originally Posted by Sky_Is_The_Limit

Why do you bother posting.

Apart from Paddo who has emailed Brad Hazzard?

I just sent an email. Short but to the point.

[Dimethyltryptamine]

Originally Posted by Brisbane_Rulz

Sydney vs Melbourne vs Brisbane

For gods sake, why do you always try bring Brisbane into it? It's not a part of the Sydney vs. Melbourne rivalry, nor any rivalry. askdjalgkjalksjdalsjdla you do my head in!

[PD]

Originally Posted by brianc68

I think Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane will sprawl AND densify. Not sure about Perth, I think it might predominantly sprawl..

I think you are right. Perth is building a higher % of detached homes than it is units and apartment.
Even though the core and other areas are densifying I dont see the overall % of higher density residential overtaking the % of detached housing anytime soon, especially not with the level of population growth we are experiencing and the need to house them.

[brianc68]

Originally Posted by Dimethyltryptamine

For gods sake, why do you always try bring Brisbane into it? It's not a part of the Sydney vs. Melbourne rivalry, nor any rivalry. askdjalgkjalksjdalsjdla you do my head in!

In case you haven't noticed, things have moved on since last century. It's generally accepted in media and govt. there is a 3 way rivalry between the east coast cities now, for everything from funding of infrastructure to events. Take notice next time you read the Fin Review or Govt press releases. The population increase in south east Queensland now means Brisbane is now a player by most measures - like it or not. In actual fact it's now a 4 city country, with Perth's explosive growth and mining wealth greatly increasing its influence as we move into this century. You have to move forward and the days where everything ended with Sydney vs. Melbourne are long gone.

[Melbourneguy]

Originally Posted by brianc68

In case you haven't noticed, things have moved on since last century. It's generally accepted in media and govt. there is a 3 way rivalry between the east coast cities now, for everything from funding of infrastructure to events. Take notice next time you read the Fin Review or Govt press releases. The population increase in south east Queensland now means Brisbane is now a player by most measures - like it or not. In actual fact it's now a 4 city country, with Perth's explosive growth and mining wealth greatly increasing its influence as we move into this century. You have to move forward and the days where everything ended with Sydney vs. Melbourne are long gone.

It's still only a city of two million people.

[Brizer]

And parochialism will always rationalise away the bleeding obvious.

Who gives a sh_t as long they ALL prosper, though within our lifetime at the very least, whether the egoes of Brisbanites like it or not, it's Sydney and Melbourne as the big dogs and Brisbane & Perth as the halfgrown pups always yelping for attention.

And I say that with all due fondness & love, of course.

I really think all this rivalry is totally pointless, a genuinely fatuous exercise. And it's not as though any single one of us is solely responsible for what happens, like it or not.

[brianc68]

Originally Posted by Melbourneguy

It's still only a city of two million people.

In a region of 3.2 million. Face it, You can't simply look at Brisbane without factoring in the Gold Coast and Sunshine Coast, both an hour in either direction. The 3rd and 6th largest cities in Australia are an hour apart. I know many find this annoying. But facts are facts.

[brianc68]

Originally Posted by Brizer

And parochialism will always rationalise away the bleeding obvious.

Who gives a sh_t as long they ALL prosper, though within our lifetime at the very least, whether the egoes of Brisbanites like it or not, it's Sydney and Melbourne as the big dogs and Brisbane & Perth as the halfgrown pups always yelping for attention.

And I say that with all due fondness & love, of course.

I really think all this rivalry is totally pointless, a genuinely fatuous exercise. And it's not as though any single one of us is solely responsible for what happens, like it or not.

You do know that the number of federal MPs in Qld is approaching the number from Victoria as the state populations get closer.. so yelping for attention will be required less and less.. that is my point, the gap is narrowing and along with that, things change.

And it would be very foolish to try to ignore Perth and WA - the only state actually firing economically. The input to GDP from Qld and WA will continue to shift the balance of power north and west.

It's similar to the shift to the south and west in the US, as states like Georgia, California and Texas gradually gained unfluence over the last 50 year's.

Australia too, will look different as this century progresses.

And BTW It's not parochialism - I'm from NSW.